Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface: the new Pleistocene
- Foreword
- Part I Definition of the base of the Quaternary
- Part II Characterization of the Pleistocene boundary-stratotype
- Part III The paleontological context of the Pleistocene boundary
- Part IV The Pleistocene boundary in regional sequences
- 11 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Italy
- 12 Stratigraphy of the Plio–Pleistocene sequence of the Mediterranean coastal belt of Israel and its implications for the evolution of the Nile Cone
- 13 The Pliocene–Pleistocene transition in the Iberian Peninsula
- 14 Biostratigraphy and calibrated climatic chronology of the Upper Pliocene and Lower Pleistocene of France
- 15 The Plio–Pleistocene of England and Iceland
- 16 The Neogene–Ouaternary boundary in The Netherlands
- 17 The Tertiary–Quaternary boundary in western Germany
- 18 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in eastern Germany
- 19 The Plio–Pleistocene of Hungary
- 20 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Romania
- 21 The Pliocene and Pleistocene of the European part of the Commonwealth of Independent States
- 22 The N/Q boundary in Asian Russia and Tadjikistan
- 23 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in the Indian subcontinent
- 24 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Japan: the Osaka Group, Kinki district
- 25 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Japan: stratigraphy in the Boso Peninsula, central Japan
- 26 The base of the Quaternary in China
- 27 Plio–Pleistocene deposits and the Quaternary boundary in sub-Saharan Africa
- 28 Plio–Pleistocene reference sections in Indonesia
- 29 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in New Zealand
- 30 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in continental sequences of North America
- Index
19 - The Plio–Pleistocene of Hungary
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2009
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of contributors
- Preface: the new Pleistocene
- Foreword
- Part I Definition of the base of the Quaternary
- Part II Characterization of the Pleistocene boundary-stratotype
- Part III The paleontological context of the Pleistocene boundary
- Part IV The Pleistocene boundary in regional sequences
- 11 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Italy
- 12 Stratigraphy of the Plio–Pleistocene sequence of the Mediterranean coastal belt of Israel and its implications for the evolution of the Nile Cone
- 13 The Pliocene–Pleistocene transition in the Iberian Peninsula
- 14 Biostratigraphy and calibrated climatic chronology of the Upper Pliocene and Lower Pleistocene of France
- 15 The Plio–Pleistocene of England and Iceland
- 16 The Neogene–Ouaternary boundary in The Netherlands
- 17 The Tertiary–Quaternary boundary in western Germany
- 18 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in eastern Germany
- 19 The Plio–Pleistocene of Hungary
- 20 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Romania
- 21 The Pliocene and Pleistocene of the European part of the Commonwealth of Independent States
- 22 The N/Q boundary in Asian Russia and Tadjikistan
- 23 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in the Indian subcontinent
- 24 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Japan: the Osaka Group, Kinki district
- 25 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in Japan: stratigraphy in the Boso Peninsula, central Japan
- 26 The base of the Quaternary in China
- 27 Plio–Pleistocene deposits and the Quaternary boundary in sub-Saharan Africa
- 28 Plio–Pleistocene reference sections in Indonesia
- 29 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in New Zealand
- 30 The Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary in continental sequences of North America
- Index
Summary
Introduction
Recent studies and investigations have agreed that paleomagnetic polarity changes are the most expedient criteria for establishing the main divisions of Quaternary stratigraphy and for tracing the “N/Q” limit between Neogene and Quaternary (actually, the Pliocene–Pleistocene boundary). In Hungary, there are two viewpoints as to where to mark the N/Q boundary: at the Gauss–Matuyama paleomagnetic boundary (Rónai, 1984), dated to 2.5 Ma, or at the top of the Olduvai event (Pasini and Colalongo, Chapter 2, this volume), dated to 1.8 Ma. Each of these reversals is close to the initiation of a period of global cooling.
If we accept the paleomagnetic polarity changes as signposts of stratigraphic boundaries, it is still necessary to reach consensus on which of the cooling events should be recognized as the lower boundary of the Quaternary. Both reversals have been recognized in Hungary, but most Hungarian scientists have long favored the view that the beginning of the Quaternary should be determined by a major stratigraphic and paleontological change, which we now know to have been almost coincident with the Gauss–Matuyama paleomagnetic boundary – see Rónai (1984) and the references cited therein.
There are several reasons to prefer this date, but the main one is that it corresponds to the most impressive change in the Carpathian Basin during the past 5–10 million years, namely, the epirogenetic uplift of that great territory in the middle of the European continent, and the regression of the Pannonian Lake, comparable to regression in the Dacic Basin (Ghenea, Chapter 20, this volume). This event changed the geomorphology of the entire region and seems also to have been coincident with the starting point of a new tectonic cycle.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Pleistocene Boundary and the Beginning of the Quaternary , pp. 206 - 215Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 1996